To win this radically different and much more difficult war, Zapatero needs the United States. On a larger level, Zapatero and his European allies must understand that soft power—perhaps the “sexual equality” Zapatero was referring to—in itself is incapable of prevailing against terror. Soft power must be backed up with hard power—military action. Zapatero’s slamming remarks on the United States not only damaged Spanish-US relations, but ultimately the security of all Spaniards. Spain needs the help of the United States in winning the War on Terror. The United States not only has the greater military power and more knowledge in terms of counter-terrorism strategies, specifically on battling Al Qaeda, but is an invaluable ally and colleague in intelligence-gathering and sharing. Zapatero must take the initiative to restore ties with the United States and avoid undiplomatic outbursts again.

But what motivated Zapatero in the first place to vehemently denounce the United States, Great Britain, and the war in Iraq? His desire to align Spain primarily with the anti-Iraq war nations France and Germany—at the expense of the United States and Great Britain—definitely played an important role. Ultimately, it seems Zapatero was driven by his quest for Spain to be a leader in the ratification of the EU constitution. By doing so, Zapatero is trying to make it easier for Spain to work with Paris and Berlin over the EU Constitution. In fact, Zapatero made it an important government initiative to persuade all Spaniards to support the constitution in their referendum in February 2005. His administration formed a highly organized and publicized campaign, with the catchy slogan, “Being First with Europe,” in order to drive people to the polls.

Famous actors and athletes were even hired to star in campaign advertisement. Ultimately, the people of Spain sent a mixed message to the rest of Europe. The Yes, or Sн, side won by a large majority, but only 42 percent of eligible voters took part. This turnout was the lowest in any national vote in Spain since the restoration of parliamentary democracy in the country more than 20 years ago. The obvious question raised is whether there a disconnect between Zapatero’s firm wish to push Spain into Europe and the will of Spaniards themselves.

Zapatero’s decision to embrace Old Europe ironically brought about a decline in Spain’s prestige and influence with the rest of the European Union. Despite his administration’s heavy campaign and his assurance to France that Spaniards were the most passionate Europeans, Zapatero indubitably looked bad after the historically low turnout of Spanish voters to the EU Constitution referendum. But perhaps what is most disturbing about Zapatero’s policy is his alacrity to sacrifice Spanish natural interests to please Old Europe.

Zapatero, during the discussions on the EU constitution, made it clear that he would be willing to compromise Spanish voting strength for the sake of agreements on the constitution. As a result, Spain has decreased voting power compared to Germany and France and thus has less influence in EU decision making. Zapatero also, as discussed earlier, pushed away an important non-EU friend, the United States, whose political support might have given Spain future leverage it might have needed to protect and even to enhance its power within the European Union in situations which required standing up to “Old Europe.” Instead, Zapatero has alienated the United States, one of Spain’s leading economic trading partners, and has started down the path of decreasing his country’s influence in European Union.

Zapatero claims his foreign policy is ultimately driven by his commitment to being a “good democrat.” Yet, his recent decision to sell arms to Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez seems to contradict his guiding principle. Spain’s factories will supply 10 C-295 transport planes, four coastal patrol corvettes, and four smaller coastguard patrol boats to the Venezuelan army. Spain’s opposition leader, Mariano Rajoy of the PP, criticized the deal as “something the Spanish government should never have done… I think what Zapatero has done is absolutely irresponsible.”

Additionally, Zapatero has further alienated the United States by this decision, which has become worried about Chavez’s build-up of arms. Indeed, Venezuela has only an army of 34,000, but reportedly bought over 100,000 AK-103 assault rifles from Russia. Zapatero may believe his decision was part of his new foreign policy, but it only served to further damage Spanish interests by alienating both the United States and other Spanish parties and politicians, supporting the Chavez regime’s possible militarism, and possibly upsetting the geopolitical landscape of South America. Zapatero must step back and truly consider what diplomatic policies are best for Spanish security. In a way, his foreign policy actions, such as the Venezuelan arms sale and most notably the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq, have been quite unilateral, despite Zapatero’s critique of the unilaterism of the Anglo-American alliance. At the very least, Zapatero must work on the consistency of his diplomacy to strengthen the image of Spain.

Erasing Spain’s Past

Zapatero’s domestic social reforms closely mirror the foreign policy reforms in showing the Socialist leader’s firm resolve to create a “New Spain” dramatically different from his predecessor. Zapatero has pushed through a bill legalizing gay marriage and adoption of children by homosexuals; the bill, which was approved by Spain’s Congress of Deputies by a vote of 187-147, will make Spain the first European country to allow homosexual people to marry and adopt children (only Belgium and the Netherlands as of now allow same-sex marriages). Zapatero has already caused rifts with the Vatican, which has urged Roman Catholic officials to lose their jobs rather than cooperate with Spanish law.

One of the most controversial reforms of the Zapatero Administration, however, is the divesting of the Catholic Church of its economic and social privileges that it has enjoyed for centuries. For example, Zapatero’s Administration has discussed reducing public support and subsidies to the Church. Moreover, the socialists have pledged not only to confront the Church fiscally, but even ideologically. The government had previously considered a measure legalizing euthanasia in all of Spain, intensely opposed by the Catholic Church; this measure has now been put on delay. Many conservatives in Spain have been unhappy toward government plans to finance the teaching of Islam in state-run schools and to allocate funds to mosques.